I've listened to a bunch of pundits throughout the day talking about the implications of the elections last night. They've said all kinds of things. But the one thing they haven't discussed is the difference in branches of government between the NJ and Virginia, which were governors, or executive branch races, with the Congressional race in upstate NY, which was of course a legislative branch election.

Based on my own personal experience, people tend to be more exploratory in governor's races than in congressional races. And the polls bear that out. But the pundits haven't explored one time, as far as I know, that the races that went Republican were executive branch, and state wide at that, and the seat that had been republican for 100 years but just went democrat was a legislative branch seat.

I think it strongly suggests that people want democrats drafting legislation, and that they are open to republicans administering it. I think fundamentally, it may be that people want a more compassionate legislation, but want it administered strictly, in order to keep budgets honest.

But the pundits were looking at only the most superficial aspects of the election. If they think they can draw implications that might be played out in a year, they are wrong. We'll see what happens then. But I have to comment in closing that I have to stick my tongue out at those pundits that keep talking about "Obama's first year" because his first year in office won't end until January 20th. That's a few months away.